Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #37

[frogwell]

I honestly don't know if it will get approval to be lifted. I'm of understanding that there was 3 factors that made the suppression to be put in place. 1. Protect victims 2. William and 3. Interferance with VIC case.

If it's true and he was acquitted, then he isn't really a registered sex offender and don't know if the suppression would apply, like what happens to the scum that are actually found guilty.

Vic case is over so that wouldn't be a factor anymore....but William's investigation is still currently ongoing so maybe this will make the suppression stay in place.

I guess it will all come down to what the law is and how good of a fight his solictor will put up IMO

So, with the other 2 options eliminated, e.g. the identity of the victims could be suppressed and the case in another state dealt with, suppression could be in response to BS being a suspect who is also a person of interest in the coronial inquiry for WT? How would that work?

 

[Thebottomline]

Well, that is my point. The anonymity was removed and she was terribly exposed to the point that I believe was harmful to her. She thought she could handle it, but the reality was far worse. She has been judged terribly by people on forums like this and can't stand up to the scrutiny. IMO

Fair point frogwell

 

[CuriousCritter]

So, with the other 2 options eliminated, e.g. the identity of the victims could be suppressed and the case in another state dealt with, suppression could be in response to BS being a suspect who is also a person of interest in the coronial inquiry for WT? How would that work?

No idea, the historicals are unrelated to William so why a suppression is needed or was a factor for the suppression order I can't understand. Maybe LE strategy. But I truly believe it all came down to VIC case still pending when put in place IMO

 

[deugirtni]

Imho, it would be terrible if BS had been acquitted in the NSW case and yet after all of the accusations that have been slung at him, that outcome not be allowed to become public knowledge.

It only makes sense there would be a suppression order on 2 trials which were related to one another, otherwise the outcome of the first trial could have potentially had an effect on the outcome of the second trial. Now that the charges have been withdrawn in the second trial, it seems there would be no further reason to continue suppressing the outcome of the first trial. However I would think the lifting of a suppression order in NSW would not be an automatic thing, based on the outcome of a trial in another jurisdiction. It would likely instead require a court ruling back in NSW to lift it, which may not be able to happen immediately, depending on how booked up the courts are.

I'm confident the outcome will become public in due course, in fact if he had been found guilty in NSW, I am confident that guilty verdict and images of MS leaving the courthouse alone would be plastered on front pages everywhere. imo.

 

[SouthAussie]

.... in fact if he had been found guilty in NSW, I am confident that guilty verdict and images of MS leaving the courthouse alone would be plastered on front pages everywhere. imo.

Yes, just as the photos of Spedding and Margaret were plastered on MSM when they were leaving the courthouse together. With suppression, no doubt, disallowing anything else from being reported.

Spedding is a named POI in the case of a little missing boy. He has been for 4 years. Matters pertaining to him are of public interest, especially when they relate to child sex crimes. No surprises there.

IF Spedding is ever cleared of any involvement in the disappearance of William, and no further findings of child sex offences are alleged, the media will ease up on him.

If the inquest comes back with an open finding, without him being cleared, Spedding will go to his grave with a cloud of suspicion hanging over him.

IMO

 

[SouthAussie]

Karlie indicated that although it would be hard, she thought it was the right thing to do to be identified as WT's mother in that Supreme court hearing. If she had said, no way, I'm sure the judge would have ruled differently. It was her choice. I would link to the caselaw document but we have been asked not to link it in the past.

Yes, Karlie did state that everyone should be identified, according to the case law. I truly don't think that she thought it would end up being just her and Brendan who could be identified.

I feel for her. I think she was ill-informed, ill-advised, and did not seek competent advice herself. It led to all kinds of difficulties for her. I hope she makes it through this whole mess, too.

 

[deugirtni]

Yes, just as the photos of Spedding and Margaret were plastered on MSM when they were leaving the courthouse together. With suppression, no doubt, disallowing anything else from being reported.

He is a named POI in the case of a little missing boy. He has been for 4 years. Matters pertaining to him are of public interest, especially when they relate to child sex crimes. No surprises there.

IF he is ever cleared of any involvement in the disappearance of William, and no further findings of child sex offences are alleged, the media will ease up on him.

If the inquest comes back with an open finding, without him being cleared, Spedding will go to his grave with a cloud of suspicion hanging over him.

IMO

I am not sure it is the mandate of a coroner's inquest to clear someone, however it is certainly a sad state of affairs for BS if he had nothing to do with WT's fate and yet a lifetime to look forward to under a cloud of suspicion.

Sometimes it is just not possible to clear POIs, for varying reasons, ie they were home alone at the time, nobody to corroborate, an investigation took too long resulting in evidence being destroyed or disappeared such as videos and/or deleted texts being overwritten, peoples' memories for exact dates and/or faces failing if not asked until months later, and etc.

To have a crime of such a disgusting nature as stealing a toddler for nefarious purposes/murder hanging over one's head for eternity, without ever being given the opportunity to answer to the accusations and defend oneself in a court of law, has got to be a horrible thing for anyone. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that perhaps the coroner's inquest can make some headway in this case to help to move it forward.

imo.

 

[SouthAussie]

Sometimes it is just not possible to clear POIs, for varying reasons, ie they were home alone at the time, nobody to corroborate, an investigation took too long resulting in evidence being destroyed or disappeared such as videos and/or deleted texts being overwritten, peoples' memories for exact dates and/or faces failing if not asked until months later, and etc.

Somehow I don't think it took very long for detectives to try to verify the details in Spedding's 10 page statement. The statement was given soon after William disappeared, not in January when the media were informed and tried to check his alibi themselves, at the time of the huge search into all of Spedding's properties.
I would think that police were asked why the huge search, and his 10 page statement was mentioned. The media seem to know exactly how long that statement is, and that some things in it didn't add up.
Just like the cars on the street ... media were told about them a year after.


Mr Spedding took part in a 10-page recorded interview with detectives soon after little William went missing on the day the tradesman was due to fix the toddler’s grandmother’s washing machine.
As they checked out everyone’s statements about where they were on that Friday, detectives allegedly found some inconsistencies in what Mr Spedding told them ......
We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph
January 22, 2015


The parents were all cleared quite quickly. Spedding would have been next on the list, if his alibi was not checked at the same time as the parents by some of the huge team of police on the case at the time.
Verfiying relevant people's whereabouts and alibis must be done with speed and accuracy in a case such as this. They were trying to find little William as quickly as they could.

IMO

 

[iailwa]

Somehow I don't think it took very long for detectives to try to verify the details in Spedding's 10 page statement. The statement was given soon after William disappeared, not in January when the media were informed and tried to check his alibi themselves, at the time of the huge search into all of Spedding's properties.
I would think that police were asked why the huge search, and his 10 page statement was mentioned. The media seem to know exactly how long that statement is, and that some things in it didn't add up.
Just like the cars on the street ... media were told about them a year after.


Mr Spedding took part in a 10-page recorded interview with detectives soon after little William went missing on the day the tradesman was due to fix the toddler’s grandmother’s washing machine.
As they checked out everyone’s statements about where they were on that Friday, detectives allegedly found some inconsistencies in what Mr Spedding told them ......
We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph
January 22, 2015


The parents were all cleared quite quickly. Spedding would have been next on the list, if his alibi was not checked at the same time as the parents by some of the huge team of police on the case at the time.
Verfiying relevant people's whereabouts and alibis must be done with speed and accuracy in a case such as this. They were trying to find little William as quickly as they could.

IMO

True. And what did BS have to hide, if he wasn't abducting a small boy that day? He could be hiding something else, yet they went ahead & searched his property. Was this because they thought a pedo ring was operating, so his alibi (if it ended up checking out) didn't matter? Or because he could not explain away the inconsistencies? It's interesting that both BS & TJ have questionable alibis for that day. MOO

 

[SouthAussie]

True. And what did BS have to hide, if he wasn't abducting a small boy that day? He could be hiding something else, yet they went ahead & searched his property. Was this because they thought a pedo ring was operating, so his alibi (if it ended up checking out) didn't matter? Or because he could not explain away the inconsistencies? It's interesting that both BS & TJ have questionable alibis for that day. MOO

I haven't actually read that Jones' alibi or statement had inconsistencies in it, as has been stated about Spedding's statement. Just that people here have noticed that his various media claims of what he did on that day are different.

The police may have a whole different view on things. Jones may have had to be counted out, not counted in. Proved that he was not involved, as opposed to proved that he could have been. All in prep for a court case, and for finding what happened to William.

 

[iailwa]

I haven't actually read that Jones' alibi had inconsistencies in it, as has been stated about Spedding's statement. Just that people here think his various media claims of what he did on that day are different. The police may have a whole different view on things.

Yes i agree. I was going to mention something about that, but I stopped short cause it was going to make my post longer & more convoluted & i'm not articulating well today... yes, it's all media stuff about AJ's alibi, from his mouth and his relatives, and through the media, which is questionable anyways. I do wonder what the police know about it. Wish we knew. It's interesting IF his alibi is questionable as well - i should say, rather

 

[SouthAussie]

I am not sure it is the mandate of a coroner's inquest to clear someone ....

Just to be clear, I was not inferring that an inquest would clear someone. That is the job of the police.

But an inquest's findings will report if the Coroner finds that someone(s) is lying ... or gave 'inconsistencies' in their police statement(s).

Deputy state coroner says Leveson’s boyfriend Michael Atkins told ‘plethora of lies’
Matthew Leveson inquest: NSW coroner delivers open finding on death

A MAN repeatedly lied about abducting and burying missing teenager Daniel Morcombe .... Giving evidence in the Maroochydore Coroners Court on Wednesday, Detective Senior Constable Ross Hutton said the person of interest known as P1 told police he had helped abduct the 13-year-old from a Sunshine Coast bus stop on December 7, 2003.
Abduction story was a lie: inquest

A FRIEND of the family of missing toddler Rahma El-Dennaoui has admitted lying under oath during an inquest into the child's disappearance held earlier this year.
Rahma inquest: friend admits to lying

SIMONE Strobel's companions lied to police about the direction the backpacker had walked when she left their campsite on the night the German backpacker was killed, Lismore Coroner's Court heard yesterday.
Simone inquest: Friend admits 'we lied to police'

 

[Blues Clues]

I am not sure it is the mandate of a coroner's inquest to clear someone, however it is certainly a sad state of affairs for BS if he had nothing to do with WT's fate and yet a lifetime to look forward to under a cloud of suspicion.

Sometimes it is just not possible to clear POIs, for varying reasons, ie they were home alone at the time, nobody to corroborate, an investigation took too long resulting in evidence being destroyed or disappeared such as videos and/or deleted texts being overwritten, peoples' memories for exact dates and/or faces failing if not asked until months later, and etc.

To have a crime of such a disgusting nature as stealing a toddler for nefarious purposes/murder hanging over one's head for eternity, without ever being given the opportunity to answer to the accusations and defend oneself in a court of law, has got to be a horrible thing for anyone. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that perhaps the coroner's inquest can make some headway in this case to help to move it forward.

imo.

BBM

That's right deugirtni, very difficult for them to say with 100% certainty (which would be required for an alibi) they saw a particular person at a particular time on a given date.

From memory as I can no longer find the link I'm after, Buzz staff were interviewed in January '15 when Police realised they hadn't been previously interviewed.

'Cafe manager Lisa, who did not wish to give her last name, said she recognised Mr Spedding and his wife but said they hadn't come into the cafe 'in a while'.

She told Daily Mail Australia that police had come into the cafe to ask if she recalled seeing Mr Spedding on September 12. 'I've seen him before but I can't remember that specific day,' she told Daily Mail Australia.'

William Spedding claims he had nothing to do with William Tyrell disappearance | Daily Mail Online

 

[SouthAussie]

BBM

That's right deugirtni, very difficult for them to say with 100% certainty (which would be required for an alibi) they saw a particular person at a particular time on a given date.

From memory as I can no longer find the link I'm after, Buzz staff were interviewed in January '15 when Police realised they hadn't been previously interviewed.

'Cafe manager Lisa, who did not wish to give her last name, said she recognised Mr Spedding and his wife but said they hadn't come into the cafe 'in a while'.

She told Daily Mail Australia that police had come into the cafe to ask if she recalled seeing Mr Spedding on September 12. 'I've seen him before but I can't remember that specific day,' she told Daily Mail Australia.'

William Spedding claims he had nothing to do with William Tyrell disappearance | Daily Mail Online

Yes, interviewed by the media in January. Not by the police in January. Nothing in that article that I can see that says the police did not interview her much, much earlier - so I am not sure how that impression has been formed.
There are certainly no words that say that police 'realised they had not interviewed her/Buzz Cafe staff before'. Unless I have missed something?

Lisa is not going to tell the media what she told the police. She did a nice side-skirt of that question.

Spedding still is not cleared. Why people are defending an uncleared POI is beyond me.

BBM
Cafe manager Lisa, who did not wish to give her last name, said she recognised Mr Spedding and his wife but said they hadn't come into the cafe 'in a while' ..... she told Daily Mail Australia.'

IMO

 

[Blues Clues]

Yes, interviewed by the media in January. Not by the police in January. Nothing in that article that I can see that says the police did not interview her much, much earlier - so I am not sure how that impression has been formed.
There are certainly no words that say that police 'realised they had not interviewed her/Buzz Cafe staff before'. Unless I have missed something?

Lisa is not going to tell the media what she told the police. She did a nice side-skirt of that question.

Spedding still is not cleared. Why people are defending an uncleared POI is beyond me.

BBM
Cafe manager Lisa, who did not wish to give her last name, said she recognised Mr Spedding and his wife but said they hadn't come into the cafe 'in a while' ..... she told Daily Mail Australia.'

IMO

Defending? No, just discussing the issue of being able to recall exact details if not asked until months after an event.

There were articles which indicated the Buzz staff were not questioned by police until December or January. As I said those articles aren't coming up when I search for them.

 

[Karinna]

Yes, interviewed by the media in January. Not by the police in January. Nothing in that article that I can see that says the police did not interview her much, much earlier - so I am not sure how that impression has been formed.
There are certainly no words that say that police 'realised they had not interviewed her/Buzz Cafe staff before'. Unless I have missed something?

Lisa is not going to tell the media what she told the police. She did a nice side-skirt of that question.

Spedding still is not cleared. Why people are defending an uncleared POI is beyond me.

BBM
Cafe manager Lisa, who did not wish to give her last name, said she recognised Mr Spedding and his wife but said they hadn't come into the cafe 'in a while' ..... she told Daily Mail Australia.'

IMO

BBM, Can you remind me please where there is an actual police presser or other than MSM stating that BS is still a high level POI?
Has Jubelin actually stated anything like that publicly?
I recall an article i think it was from LE but not certain, where BS had gone down on their list of POI's according to their investigation?

 

[frogwell]

Yes, interviewed by the media in January. Not by the police in January. Nothing in that article that I can see that says the police did not interview her much, much earlier - so I am not sure how that impression has been formed.
There are certainly no words that say that police 'realised they had not interviewed her/Buzz Cafe staff before'. Unless I have missed something?

Lisa is not going to tell the media what she told the police. She did a nice side-skirt of that question.

Spedding still is not cleared. Why people are defending an uncleared POI is beyond me.

BBM
Cafe manager Lisa, who did not wish to give her last name, said she recognised Mr Spedding and his wife but said they hadn't come into the cafe 'in a while' ..... she told Daily Mail Australia.'

IMO

BBM
Because of the timing of the article and the ambiguity of when police interviewed other people to corroborate BS alibi. i.e. the cafe and the school. There are question marks there. IMO

 

[frogwell]

BBM, Can you remind me please where there is an actual police presser or other than MSM stating that BS is still a high level POI?
Has Jubelin actually stated anything like that publicly?
I recall an article i think it was from LE but not certain, where BS had gone down on their list of POI's according to their investigation?

William Tyrrell search: Police have five ‘high priority’ suspects
The man identified as a prime suspect by police, in the weeks after his disappearance has always maintained he had nothing to do with it.

A police investigation learned the man had been at the home William went missing from days earlier to quote on a washing machine repair and returned a week later to complete the job.

The man provided police with DNA swabs and was subsequently charged with unrelated offences.

 

[Karinna]

How closely do MSM & LE work together on stories for their news articles? Or can MSM just put any spin they like in their articles if it sells their product?

 

[Karinna]

William Tyrrell search: Police have five ‘high priority’ suspects
The man identified as a prime suspect by police, in the weeks after his disappearance has always maintained he had nothing to do with it.

A police investigation learned the man had been at the home William went missing from days earlier to quote on a washing machine repair and returned a week later to complete the job.

The man provided police with DNA swabs and was subsequently charged with unrelated offences.

Yes but that is MSM's story isn't it? Where exactly do they get their info. from? How accurate is their info.? I'm asking because i don't know and i do know media can spin things in certain ways to sell stories.
Isn't that why BS is suing them?